Adidas Stycon Laceless Tennis Shoe

tennisgurl

Semi-Pro

Summary: less than stellar review by TW Playtesters in the Stycon review video that came out today. They like the innovative idea sure, but 3 out of 4 complained about comfort, heaviness/bulkiness and lack of midsole cushioning. Jason and Troy started developing arch pain and Booney said Adidas definitely have some work to do as far as comfort is concerned. No apparent issues in stability for any playtester. Chris liked the shoe better than others and was okay with it in all aspects.
Yeah, low to the ground feel and stability at expense of comfort, cushioning and lack of maneuverability (bulkiness) doesn't really sound like a winner to me. Isn't exactly an innovation in my book. Well unless you count the laceless bit. But yeah, like I said earlier unless they tweak the shoe they're going nowhere with this, fast.
 

Faris

Professional
People forget that there aren't just pros or positives to removing laces, it affects the whole shoe fit and feel overall and since everyone's feet are different holding foot in a secure manner with the right fit and comfort for everyone is going to be next to impossible. Amazes me that some who allegedly play tennis and (post crap so often here it gets nauseating) don't know that.
:)
 
Imitation is the highest form of flattery, and so I have no doubt that there will be many companies that will try to imitate that concept.

:)
 

haqq777

Legend
Yeah, low to the ground feel and stability at expense of comfort, cushioning and lack of maneuverability (bulkiness) doesn't really sound like a winner to me. Isn't exactly an innovation in my book. Well unless you count the laceless bit. But yeah, like I said earlier unless they tweak the shoe they're going nowhere with this, fast.
Yeah, I agree. Interestingly enough Mark, Jason and Troy all mentioned what I had said in my detailed review as well. I too felt the lack of cushioning and comfort to be bothersome and the shoes to feel bulky. The laceless bit to give stability, in my humble opinion, is a dud given the associated negatives it comes with.
 

haqq777

Legend
Surely you mean that for the Stycon design and not all laceless shoes?
Yes, that is what I meant. I'm sure laceless concept shoes work great in multiple areas (basketball etc) and provide requisite stability minus the comfort related flaws. But the Stycons, in particular, didn't impress me.
 

Holdfast44ID

Semi-Pro
They might as well make shoes in a two-piece design. Put the top part on first, over your ankles, then slide feet into the bottom. Then lower and attach the top. Lol

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk
 
Let's hope they don't imitate the poor execution, but it is a first attempt and failure is good. And Adidas have failed bravely.
Adidas advertised the shoe as a stability low to the ground shoe (watch the video with the designer of the shoe), and that is what they achieved from what most people that played in them say. Everything else is secondary, and the jury on their attempt at introducing laceless as an additional feature is out there (I don't pay much attention to people who have spent the majority of their time blasting the shoe before even trying it, upon trying it, and after having said things that they backtracked on or tried to sweep under the carpet, and also who have more Nikes in their closets than forks in their cupboards). Fit is a personal matter. The user Sardines on the forum found the shoe to be comfortable, and Chris from the play testers of the TTW had only good things to say about it. I am sorry if someone had problems with it, but, like I said, fit is personal and the distinction between that and problems of the shoe should be clear to anyone with even a little bit of experience with shoes.

With that shoe Adidas adds another shoe with ever so slightly different characteristics. They have:

1) SCB, their flagship cushioned and stability shoe (wide toebox)
2) Stycon, their stability shoe that is very low to the ground (the lowest from all their offerings) (medium to wide toebox)
3) Übersonic 3, their light fast shoe with wide toebox
4) Übersonic 2, their light fast shoe with medium/medium-narrow toebox
5) SMB, their budget version of a cushioned stability shoe
6) Court Jam Bounce, their budget version of a lightweight cushioned stability shoe
7) various others for the casual recreational player (Defiant Bounce, Game Court, Legacy Edbergs etc)

The Stycon is both stable and gives extremely connected to the ground feel. Most stability shoes lack that feel to one extend or another and that is true even more for stability and heavily cushioned shoes, so Stycon is a shoe with specific characteristics that probably some players will find highly desirable.

 

Faris

Professional
lolz, 3 out of 4 playtesters gave a serious thumbs down, and atleast 4 posters right here on the forum who have directly dealt with the shoe one way or the other have mentioned clearly the issues it comes with (specifically the stability giving way to bulkiness and lack of maneuverability) and lack of comfort etc due to the fit. But no, one specific poster here is so damn obtuse, he has to write essays about redundant and irrelevant info to try and make claims about the shoe already been addressed a dozen times. Like seriously, get a hobby man (and no, posting non stop on this forum till you drop dead doesn't count).
 

Faris

Professional
Let's hope they don't imitate the poor execution, but it is a first attempt and failure is good. And Adidas have failed bravely.
Well said, full points to Adidas for trying. If they do go ahead and somehow are able to make the concept work down the line with tweaks etc, I'm def down with the program. But Stycons, that were advertised as the laceless next coming of tennis shoeware I wouldn't consider a success personally.
 

tennisgurl

Semi-Pro
lolz, 3 out of 4 playtesters gave a serious thumbs down, and atleast 4 posters right here on the forum who have directly dealt with the shoe one way or the other have mentioned clearly the issues it comes with (specifically the stability giving way to bulkiness and lack of maneuverability) and lack of comfort etc due to the fit. But no, one specific poster here is so damn obtuse, he has to write essays about redundant and irrelevant info to try and make claims about the shoe already been addressed a dozen times. Like seriously, get a hobby man (and no, posting non stop on this forum till you drop dead doesn't count).
lol, well, Stanislav Goussev, the senior design director for Stycon project (who was also in the marketing video titled Adidas Stycon: behind the design of the first laceless tennis shoe), clearly suggests that the design template of the shoe started with keeping in mind that the shoe was going to be a midcut and laceless shoe. It was then that they started working on how to provide stability using the deeper midsole cushion and how the upper with bends would encapsulate the foot.

Also the Category Director Daniel Nueurberg mentions proudly that they have made the first laceless shoe in tennis now available to purchase from Tennis Warehouse . And that they have managed to give the shoe support and stability using a laceless design. That is clearly their marketing and selling point for Stycon. The stability bit is what they are saying is excellent using this new design. Hard to disagree with it really (unless you have a bruised ego or something that you want to stroke using irrelevant info) ;)

Oh, and comfort issues due to the fit and design of the shoe especially when 3/4 playtesters (with different feet shapes and arches) bring those up, well that is a red flag and a shoe problem. Just throwing it out there.
 

haqq777

Legend
lol, well, Stanislav Goussev, the senior design director for Stycon project (who was also in the marketing video titled Adidas Stycon: behind the design of the first laceless tennis shoe), clearly suggests that the design template of the shoe started with keeping in mind that the shoe was going to be a midcut and laceless shoe. It was then that they started working on how to provide stability using the deeper midsole cushion and how the upper with bends would encapsulate the foot.

Also the Category Director Daniel Nueurberg mentions proudly that they have made the first laceless shoe in tennis now available to purchase from Tennis Warehouse . And that they have managed to give the shoe support and stability using a laceless design. That is clearly their marketing and selling point for Stycon. The stability bit is what they are saying is excellent using this new design. Hard to disagree with it really (unless you have a bruised ego or something that you want to stroke using irrelevant info) ;)

Oh, and comfort issues due to the fit and design of the shoe especially when 3/4 playtesters (with different feet shapes and arches) bring those up, well that is a red flag and a shoe problem. Just throwing it out there.
Yes, I agree. And I have spoken with multiple regional Adidas reps about it and Stycon's big marketing spiel slash selling point, in fact the whole introduction of it, is that it is a midcut style laceless shoe with an innovative new design that allows it to be what is without laces. No one said "the new, super stable, low to the ground shoe" :sneaky:
 
"We started with the shoe 18 months ago (well before any Tsitsipas problems). ... The idea is even if we talk about a mid cut type of laceless shoe, but actually the heart of the whole thing is this piece. It is the midsole. And what you will see is that there are two things that are different to the conventional type of footwear. One is the super-high side walls. The foot is sitting inside .. it is almost encapsulated by the midsole. It is a dual density construction the green is a bit firmer and the white is super plush bounce compound. The other thing is the height of the side walls, so when you do lateral movements .. your foot is very secure. Then it was like, what if the whole shoe was originally just super high side walls and a sock."*

The designer of the shoe talks at length about the central piece of the shoe and and only once mentioned with any relation to the whole concept laceless. One would think that he would have known what the shoe is about, and would have paid more attention to the most important part of the shoe.

He doesn't even bother to call the "central piece of the concept" with its proper name, but instead calls it "a sock". :-D



* passages highlighted for relevance to the actual concept of the shoe and the timeline of development of the shoe details (i.e. which came after which).
 

Faris

Professional
Yes, I agree. And I have spoken with multiple regional Adidas reps about it and Stycon's big marketing spiel slash selling point, in fact the whole introduction of it, is that it is a midcut style laceless shoe with an innovative new design that allows it to be what is without laces. No one said "the new, super stable, low to the ground shoe" :sneaky:
:-D(y)
 

sanister

Professional
lol, well, Stanislav Goussev, the senior design director for Stycon project (who was also in the marketing video titled Adidas Stycon: behind the design of the first laceless tennis shoe), clearly suggests that the design template of the shoe started with keeping in mind that the shoe was going to be a midcut and laceless shoe. It was then that they started working on how to provide stability using the deeper midsole cushion and how the upper with bends would encapsulate the foot.

Also the Category Director Daniel Nueurberg mentions proudly that they have made the first laceless shoe in tennis now available to purchase from Tennis Warehouse . And that they have managed to give the shoe support and stability using a laceless design. That is clearly their marketing and selling point for Stycon. The stability bit is what they are saying is excellent using this new design. Hard to disagree with it really (unless you have a bruised ego or something that you want to stroke using irrelevant info) ;)

Oh, and comfort issues due to the fit and design of the shoe especially when 3/4 playtesters (with different feet shapes and arches) bring those up, well that is a red flag and a shoe problem. Just throwing it out there.
Yes, true. And may I add that when you start your design project with already a silhouette of the shoe in mind and knowing it has to be laceless for the sake of 'innovation', as the design team for Stycon did, its a fool's errand to argue the raison d'etre any other way. As haqq above pointed out, they didn't push the shoe in market for it's low-to-the-ground raw feel, or stability etc. It was the laceless bit (which should be very very obvious).
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
I usually dislike youtube videos but my take of this review, from the few points I saw in that video, it's not surprisingly the guy who is on his forefeet the most, and thus lightest on his feet, is also the guy who likes the shoe the most. Those who lamented for more cushioning tended to be heavier with their footwork.
As for the fit/comfort, the shape of the toe box, the elastic bands and the high sidewalls logically fits narrower/slimmer/low-medium arched feet better. There's no way it can ever be a one size fit all. The encapsulated midsole design is where the bulk is at, and that weight is around and below the foot, making it feel less bulky than a similarly weighted shoe with heavy uppers, like the SCB. All shoe manufacturers should be much more descriptive in the webpages about fit and size, in this age of internet shopping. I walked into my Adidas retail store to buy the Stycon and the sales person didn't bother to mention anything even though I didn't try the shoe. Only at the cashier when I opened the 2 boxes to check the shoes, did the manager say one pair was a return cos it was too narrow for the buyer. Maybe when 5G comes, we can get volumetric measurements of the shoe, within manufacturer tolerances, and never have to worry about ill-fitting shoes again.
Many who tried the Stycon are likely more conscious and sensitive of any 'different' sensations to their more conventional shoes, creating an implicit bias toward negativity of any 'unnatural' sensation. I was the same way with the N3xt L3v3l shoes, that it was too tight on my foot, not stable enough and too warm. Only thing that wasn't bias is the warmth part, because of the mid cut, again by logic. And now with the Stycon, I acclimated faster.
To paraphase a lawyer who was good at warping facts, "if the shoe doesn't fit, you should just quit (or at least return it)!"

"We started with the shoe 18 months ago (well before any Tsitsipas problems). ... The idea is even if we talk about a mid cut type of laceless shoe, but actually the heart of the whole thing is this piece. It is the midsole. And what you will see is that there are two things that are different to the conventional type of footwear. One is the super-high side walls. The foot is sitting inside .. it is almost encapsulated by the midsole. It is a dual density construction the green is a bit firmer and the white is super plush bounce compound. The other thing is the height of the side walls, so when you do lateral movements .. your foot is very secure. Then it was like, what if the whole shoe was originally just super high side walls and a sock."*
Where are you getting these quotes from? Sounds to me like the person you've quoted is a very educated native-english speaker but not the first language. The 2 design functions are the result of the high sidewall design, so it's not 2 separate design features, but one integral design to deals with these 2 functions.
I would think the initial design concept would list what would be needed to achieve that design concept. They already had that flange outsole of the SMB/SCB. I assume since the N3xt L3v3ls did so well in basketball, and the design concept translates well to tennis, that laceless was the initial primary design concept feature, which that midsole was then conceived to meet those concept parameters. So while the midsole design is the key design feature of the concept shoe, I think it was the result of the initial laceless concept. It wouldn't make much sense to develop a high side wall midsole first and then decide on the upper design. The look was also in the initial concept, because the name is Stability, sTYle, and iCON, at least that's what the sales literature says.
That said, the negatively 'laced' comments on the Stycon is somewhat consistent with most internet forums on new products that challenge conventional thinking, so I'm not surprised.
 
I usually dislike youtube videos but my take of this review, from the few points I saw in that video, it's not surprisingly the guy who is on his forefeet the most, and thus lightest on his feet, is also the guy who likes the shoe the most. Those who lamented for more cushioning tended to be heavier with their footwork.
As for the fit/comfort, the shape of the toe box, the elastic bands and the high sidewalls logically fits narrower/slimmer/low-medium arched feet better. There's no way it can ever be a one size fit all. The encapsulated midsole design is where the bulk is at, and that weight is around and below the foot, making it feel less bulky than a similarly weighted shoe with heavy uppers, like the SCB. All shoe manufacturers should be much more descriptive in the webpages about fit and size, in this age of internet shopping. I walked into my Adidas retail store to buy the Stycon and the sales person didn't bother to mention anything even though I didn't try the shoe. Only at the cashier when I opened the 2 boxes to check the shoes, did the manager say one pair was a return cos it was too narrow for the buyer. Maybe when 5G comes, we can get volumetric measurements of the shoe, within manufacturer tolerances, and never have to worry about ill-fitting shoes again.
Many who tried the Stycon are likely more conscious and sensitive of any 'different' sensations to their more conventional shoes, creating an implicit bias toward negativity of any 'unnatural' sensation. I was the same way with the N3xt L3v3l shoes, that it was too tight on my foot, not stable enough and too warm. Only thing that wasn't bias is the warmth part, because of the mid cut, again by logic. And now with the Stycon, I acclimated faster.
To paraphase a lawyer who was good at warping facts, "if the shoe doesn't fit, you should just quit (or at least return it)!"


Where are you getting these quotes from? Sounds to me like the person you've quoted is a very educated native-english speaker but not the first language. The 2 design functions are the result of the high sidewall design, so it's not 2 separate design features, but one integral design to deals with these 2 functions.
I would think the initial design concept would list what would be needed to achieve that design concept. They already had that flange outsole of the SMB/SCB. I assume since the N3xt L3v3ls did so well in basketball, and the design concept translates well to tennis, that laceless was the initial primary design concept feature, which that midsole was then conceived to meet those concept parameters. So while the midsole design is the key design feature of the concept shoe, I think it was the result of the initial laceless concept. It wouldn't make much sense to develop a high side wall midsole first and then decide on the upper design. The look was also in the initial concept, because the name is Stability, sTYle, and iCON, at least that's what the sales literature says.
That said, the negatively 'laced' comments on the Stycon is somewhat consistent with most internet forums on new products that challenge conventional thinking, so I'm not surprised.
The quotes are from the video with the designer of the shoe. He clearly stated that their purpose was to provide the said stability and low to the ground position as their primary goal. As I already noted, he talked about it almost the entire time. I don't think that the designer of the shoe will almost completely ignore the laceless feature, if that is what they though the shoe is about. He clearly stated that the timeline of the development of the shoe featured first the idea of the midsole and then everything else, including the design of the upper. I trust the designer of the shoe more, and actually, I made the remark about the shoe being ascribed the wrong main feature, even before the most recent reviews were out, and certainly before the recent comments.

I don't see why it should be one or the other. There is no issue with accepting that Adidas wanted to create stability low to the ground shoe that has no laces. They have such a shoe in other sport, so why not for tennis? That doesn't deter from the feature of the shoe as a stability oriented shoe. They wanted to build that, and they wanted it to be low to the ground for supposedly maximum court feel. That is a decidedly different concept that all of their other stability offerings on the market at the moment, and if one wants to describe the shoe to someone who wants to use it, it will be in the stability category, not in the laceless category. Laces are not and have never been the main point of tennis shoes, just like ventilation is not and has never been the main point of a tennis shoe (although more of it is welcome in general).

 

haqq777

Legend
Mind boggling amount of purposeful misinformation being spouted here. The designer started (bolded and underlined) with a silhouette of a midcut and laceless design before anything else. Then the midsole design with higher sidewalls came into being to provide requisite support and stability. The lead designer of the project didn't state anything to the contrary. @tennisgurl has a great post up there that clarifies it all.
 

Faris

Professional
Mind boggling amount of purposeful misinformation being spouted here. The designer started (bolded and underlined) with a silhouette of a midcut and laceless design before anything else. Then the midsole design with higher sidewalls came into being to provide requisite support and stability. The lead designer of the project didn't state anything to the contrary. @tennisgurl has a great post up there that clarifies it all.
Height of trolling I mean he even added his own thoughts in alleged cherry picked quotes mixing it all up. I mean I swear, lengths people go to trying to cover their losing arguments! :-D

And I agree, I also think @tennisgurl's post (click here) sums it very well.
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
Well in the end, what the initial concept parameters were doesn't really matter, other than being right. The Stycon is here, so all that is moot.

The quotes are from the video with the designer of the shoe. He clearly stated that their purpose was to provide the said stability and low to the ground position as their primary goal....
Speaking of one of the main design elements, I can't believe there's still harping on laces. No one is telling anyone to buy this shoe if they don't like it. I am here to discuss the merits and issues of the Stycon. I've broken laces in my lifetime as a player, more than 4 times in competition, including last year on clay. That's nothing like academy trained kids nowadays. The college players I hit with a couple of times a month have shredded laces, and they wanted to try the Stycon but they can't cos their colleges are sponsored Nike and NB. LOL.
Still don't believe broken laces is an issue? For further proof of the issue, look no further than the Nike Vapor Cage 4. The inside vamp is higher to protect the laces from being shredded. Would 2 major brands have designed into their top tier shoes ways to protect the shoes laces from a "non-existent" problem?!? Shoelaces tearing from sliding is real, but obviously not everyone suffers from them. Shoelaces shifting is also a real thing, especially with waxed laces and hook eyelets.
All that said, the Stycon is a great shoe for only for some foot types, and there are issues that need to be addressed to broaden the shoe's appeal. First off, there is obviously a need for a 'Stycon Plus', for those who can't handle the elastic band pressure on the arches. Building in an extra few mm more elastic should help wider or more sensitive feet. The sock liner in the upper definitely needs to be more vented/breathable for higher than low 70s°F and 70% humidity. The pointy toe box shape precludes certain foot shapes, unless you size up, which may also help with the band issue.

The positives of the Stycon? Stability! All highly stable shoes have a cradle for support, and the Stycon has one of the highest, if not the highest, sidewalls of all tennis shoes. It's the most stable shoe out there, but those who are feedback oriented will feel insecure because it doesn't feel like a conventional shoe. The physics is sound, and only if your foot slips out of the deep cradle, can there be instability. Those elastic bands will keep your feet in the cradle. And that brings me to support. The sockliner/elastic band supports the foot well (too well for some!) so if you are on your forefoot a lot, you'll feel no hindrance on footwork. In fact, that midsole acts like the Air Zoom Zero, in that it slight leans you forward on your forefoot, which is good for proper footwork.
Low to the ground, court feel are also strong points. For me, cushioning is good, a firm but comfortable ride. I have triedthe Superfeet Carbon insole for a bit more arch support, and there is little drop in comfort from the bands, just a bit more pressure. Jumping on the heel with the insole makes it more cushy, but not something I need. Ankle support is also good, something lacking in other low profile shoes.
Durability of the outsole is as good as the SCB. I've played a lot and it's holding up well. The upper is tougher than it looks, taking some scraping from my foot drags on my backfoot.
As I've mentioned before, I do use the clay black Stycon on hard courts. The wear is the same so it's the same Adiwear rubber. There isn't a torsion bar cutout in the outsole, so I can't say if it's left out of the clay shoe. I don't feel any discernible difference in stability with either models on hard court. I've played twice on red clay, and the mid cut does keep clay out of the shoes. Funnily I did find temporary shrinkage of the elastic band on the right shoe after washing off the clay with water. The left shoe was also wet but didn't feel tighter. I had the same with my N3xt L3v3ls.
Any other questions, please ask here. After all, we are here to share information about gear, the good and the bad. Otherwise, I think I've said all I can about the Stycon. Enjoy it or hate it, but don't lose too much sleep over it!
 
Last edited:

sanister

Professional
Speaking of one of the main design elements, I can't believe there's still harping on laces. No one is telling anyone to buy this shoe if they don't like it. I am here to discuss the merits and issues of the Stycon. I've broken laces in my lifetime as a player, more than 4 times in competition, including last year on clay. That's nothing like academy trained kids nowadays. The college players I hit with a couple of times a month have shredded laces, and they wanted to try the Stycon but they can't cos their colleges are sponsored Nike and NB. LOL.
Still don't believe broken laces is an issue? For further proof of the issue, look no further than the Nike Vapor Cage 4. The inside vamp is higher to protect the laces from being shredded. Would 2 major brands have designed into their top tier shoes ways to protect the shoes laces from a "non-existent" problem?!? Shoelaces tearing from sliding is real, but obviously not everyone suffers from them. Shoelaces shifting is also a real thing, especially with waxed laces and hook eyelets.
All that said, the Stycon is a great shoe for only for some foot types, and there are issues that need to be addressed to broaden the shoe's appeal. First off, there is obviously a need for a 'Stycon Plus', for those who can't handle the elastic band pressure on the arches. Building in an extra few mm more elastic should help wider or more sensitive feet. The sock liner in the upper definitely needs to be more vented/breathable for higher than low 70s°F and 70% humidity. The pointy toe box shape precludes certain foot shapes, unless you size up, which may also help with the band issue.

The positives of the Stycon? Stability! All highly stable shoes have a cradle for support, and the Stycon has one of the highest, if not the highest, sidewalls of all tennis shoes. It's the most stable shoe out there, but those who are feedback oriented will feel insecure because it doesn't feel like a conventional shoe. The physics is sound, and only if your foot slips out of the deep cradle, can there be instability. Those elastic bands will keep your feet in the cradle. And that brings me to support. The sockliner/elastic band supports the foot well (too well for some!) so if you are on your forefoot a lot, you'll feel no hindrance on footwork. In fact, that midsole acts like the Air Zoom Zero, in that it slight leans you forward on your forefoot, which is good for proper footwork.
Low to the ground, court feel are also strong points. For me, cushioning is good, a firm but comfortable ride. I have triedthe Superfeet Carbon insole for a bit more arch support, and there is little drop in comfort from the bands, just a bit more pressure. Jumping on the heel with the insole makes it more cushy, but not something I need. Ankle support is also good, something lacking in other low profile shoes.
Durability of the outsole is as good as the SCB. I've played a lot and it's holding up well. The upper is tougher than it looks, taking some scraping from my foot drags on my backfoot.
As I've mentioned before, I do use the clay black Stycon on hard courts. The wear is the same so it's the same Adiwear rubber. There isn't a torsion bar cutout in the outsole, so I can't say if it's left out of the clay shoe. I don't feel any discernible difference in stability with either models on hard court. I've played twice on red clay, and the mid cut does keep clay out of the shoes. Funnily I did find temporary shrinkage of the elastic band on the right shoe after washing off the clay with water. The left shoe was also wet but didn't feel tighter. I had the same with my N3xt L3v3ls.
Any other questions, please ask here. After all, we are here to share information about gear, the good and the bad. Otherwise, I think I've said all I can about the Stycon. Enjoy it or hate it, but don't lose too much sleep over it!
Well, to be honest, atleast 4 posters including myself have talked about the issues and demerits of the shoe having firsthand experience with it. You make it sound like we all are taking a dump on the shoe for no reason. Not fair to assume that, certainly not the case.

Also, speaking of college tennis, one of my son will be a sophomore this year and he plays at #4 for a good D1 school. I noted that in another thread not too long ago as well. His school has been consistently ranked in the top three of his conference making it to regionals and even making state. I have traveled with him a lot through the course of him starting tennis as a kid until he chose his school, met with numerous college parents, attended tournaments, met coaches, met staff you name it (if you know the tennis woes of parents you'll know this traveling bit is a big one). And let me tell you; the biggest issue kids have with gear is shoes soles wearing out fast. It isn't with laces breaking, or shoes not breathing etc. Barricades were hugely popular for that reason, because they lasted so long and then they had the 6 month warranty. In fact I have never seen or heard anyone shredding their laces like you say. Maybe court surface has something to do with it but all the matches in our conference are on outdoor hard or indoors Mondo sort of surface (no clay). All kids are really, really good movers like you would expect at D1 level.

Also imp to note that shoes are an out of pocket expense for most of us, and aren't covered by school's kit deal (his school has a contract with Nike). Sure for some top schools with elite tennis programs, these big companies dump money and then students would then be obligated to wear that specific brand shoe but that isn't the case with us or with a big majority of D1 tennis programs that I know of. I also know on very good authority that DII, DIII and NAIA schools have no such rule either that students can only wear a specific brand.

Coming to example you gave for Cage 4, it is simply a design revamp. If laces were as big an issue as you are making it sound like, one would think these companies wouldn't wait till 2020 to address the issue since modern tennis wasn't exactly born yesterday. Vapor line, and Cages from before, and even Zoom Zero which was launched in 2018, all have pretty mainstream lacing systems. Not to say laces may or may not break or the eyelets may not come off etc. But that isn't something mainstream tennis shoe manufacturers seem to be worried about too much. Just have a look at all the offerings in the market at the moment and you'll understand where I am coming from.

I also read your comment earlier about being light on forefoot and the Stycon shoe helping with it, kind of like Zoom Zero. I have a pair of Zoom Zeros. Stycon is nothing like it, in my opinion. Stycon felt much lower to the ground and isn't curve designed like Zoom Zeroes. Also, the difference in comfort between Bounce midsole of the Stycon versus full air zoom unit underfoot of Zoom Zero is night and day, my friend.

Where I do agree with you is that Stycons seem to be suited for certain foot types That said, I do think that if your foot isn't the right shape, you are not going to get the right fit regardless. Sizing up may help with the elastic bands pushing less on the top of the foot, but will not solve your fit issue. Also with you in that I think Stycon 2.0 revamped that addresses some issues posters and playtesters mentioned, will be welcome addition.

All that said, I assure you, no sleep will be lost over a pair of shoes, at least by me. There are much bigger issues in life than arguing over a pair of shoes.

Cheers
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
Stycon Boa gate redux: I was just sent these by someone:



It would make sense that Thiem and Tsitsipas were given preproduction samples in various forms, and the original release was probably with boa, and I'm sure many retailers were given samples too, and someone threw these boa-ed samples on gumtree. Seems to be the reason why they were playing with boa versions. I believe someone had tried a pre-release model at the beginning of the thread and didn't mention boa systems. So the dropping of boa could be recent.
 
Done with these shoes. 1st one too small. traded for next size up. Too small in areas but tight still in others. ugh.
I'm not in the market for these shoes, but out of curiosity, I grabbed a box of them at the weekend to try them on. Literally the first thing that struck is how heavy they feel in hand.

Did you get a chance to take the court in any of the pairs you bought? Did you find them sluggish?
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
I'm not in the market for these shoes, but out of curiosity, I grabbed a box of them at the weekend to try them on. Literally the first thing that struck is how heavy they feel in hand.

Did you get a chance to take the court in any of the pairs you bought? Did you find them sluggish?
never made it. My issue was fit. the 2nd one was weird. It was tight and loose at the same time. 1st one was tight on one foot. 2nd one I couldnt just sit with it on. After a while I had to take them off because of discomfort. But when walking parts seemed loose.
 
It's gotta be the biggest failure of a new tennis shoe line ever.

And I'm saying this as an Adidas fan.

CoVid-19 definitely affects things, but that is across the board for any sports apparel / equipment manufacturers atm.

The Stycon was in serious trouble and already on markdown before Co-Vid's international impact. And the player who was supposed to endorse the shoe abandoned them and prefers to wear a different model.
 
D

Deleted member 768841

Guest
It's gotta be the biggest failure of a new tennis shoe line ever.

And I'm saying this as an Adidas fan.

CoVid-19 definitely affects things, but that is across the board for any sports apparel / equipment manufacturers atm.

The Stycon was in serious trouble and already on markdown before Co-Vid's international impact. And the player who was supposed to endorse the shoe abandoned them and prefers to wear a different model.
Yeah... Adidas and tsitsipas really didn’t flow with the stycon, he never wore it during a professional match, so I don’t know what’s up there, and now the shoe is being marked down.
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
Checking TW page this afternoon and found out Adidas low key having the Stycon BOA on sale right now...https://www.tennis-warehouse.com/adidas_Stycon_BOA_White_Red_Mens_Shoe/descpageMSADIDAS-AMFIWRB.html
That looks great! Not sure how the BOA system changes the feel of the shoe though. BOA works with a thicker tongue so the thin laces don't cut into the foot. The real appeal are the bands for me. But this for more people with wider foot types.
Stock clearance is something every place does. It's quite obvious TW had a special deal with Adidas in the US for the shoe, since they have a variety of sizes and that video with Adidas employees mentioning TW. And maybe this is actually a trial shoe Adidas manufactured and then switched to the released shoe and gave it to TW to clear for them. Makes sense as samples of the BOA shoe have been popping up online for sale as I mentioned before. Thanks for the headsup!
 
Last edited:

djNEiGht

Hall of Fame
My guess would be the boa version would be easier to get into and then accommodate a wider variety of feet than the laceless model.
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
My guess would be the boa version would be easier to get into and then accommodate a wider variety of feet than the laceless model.
Depends on whether the cross band, which is the hindrance to foot entry/exit, is removed. The sockliner, looking at my Stycon, isn't thick enough to prevent the thin BOA laces from being felt I think. My other BOA shoes have thick tongues. Still I'm trying to get confirmation from the TW staff before purchasing.
 
Last edited:

Sardines

Hall of Fame
Opps forgot to update. Tried the Boa version. It does what it's supposed to do, tighten the feel of the sockliner without creasing the upper primeknit. I'll be keeping this one for the colorway but I like the Stycon V.1.0 with the bands more, since it's a slip on and forget, versus tightening and loosening the Boa version. And yes they did remove the bands so there isn't that compression feel as much, for those who like a little less pressure on their feet.
 
Last edited:

Sardines

Hall of Fame
@Sardines - good to hear it should work out for you. I'd prob pass as i have a wide footprint as much as this shoe interests me.
I would suggest you try it out if you're looking for close to ground and stable shoes. Personally I think the BOA was a co-production which was never coming out to market. The fact that there are 3 different colors for the Stycon v1.0 shows this.
 

SlvrDragon50

Semi-Pro
Is anyone wearing the Stycon with an ankle brace? Love the BOA and would really like to try it out.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
 
D

Deleted member 768841

Guest
Is anyone wearing the Stycon with an ankle brace? Love the BOA and would really like to try it out.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
Imma be honest, I haven’t worn a pair of shoes for over a month. Quarantine is a blessing and a curse.
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
Is anyone wearing the Stycon with an ankle brace? Love the BOA and would really like to try it out.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
It feels like a sock already in the ankle. With socks on, it feels like a thin neoprene compression/brace like fit around and just above the malleolus/ankle bones, but not around the calcaneus/heel area, so it's brace like in a way, but very light. It's one of the great points about the Stycon.
However, if you are accustomed to, or need strap braces, I doubt it'll be comfortable with a strap brace on. My ecto-mesomorph ankles aren't large and it feels like a sock already. But I think if you have endomorphic ankles, an ankle brace would make it feel too restrictive. I would also imagine a thick ankle with brace would mean the upper would start rubbing into the ankle too. I'll get my daughter to measure the shoe properly around the ankles for a proper idea.
 

SlvrDragon50

Semi-Pro
It feels like a sock already in the ankle. With socks on, it feels like a thin neoprene compression/brace like fit around and just above the malleolus/ankle bones, but not around the calcaneus/heel area, so it's brace like in a way, but very light. It's one of the great points about the Stycon.
However, if you are accustomed to, or need strap braces, I doubt it'll be comfortable with a strap brace on. My ecto-mesomorph ankles aren't large and it feels like a sock already. But I think if you have endomorphic ankles, an ankle brace would make it feel too restrictive. I would also imagine a thick ankle with brace would mean the upper would start rubbing into the ankle too. I'll get my daughter to measure the shoe properly around the ankles for a proper idea.
Hmm okay. My ankles are probably on the narrower end as I usually have issues with heel hold, but the brace does widen it quite a bit. My complaint with my SCB and my brace is that it is quite difficult to tighten the shoe down with the brace because there's no heel lock holes for the laces. BOA would in theory allow me to crank the shoe down easily. I may just need to buy a pair and try it out.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
As I said, with the sockliner acting like a soft ankle brace, and the super stability of the shoe, I suggest maybe a thinner brace may work as well, unless you need the extra protection due to previous injury. The shoe is really stable so the only real risk of rolling is a misstep from changes of direction or bad landing from a jump. Unlike some other 'swooshie' shoes, the cradle side wall is very high and so spilling out and rolling the ankle is quite difficult to do.
 

SlvrDragon50

Semi-Pro
As I said, with the sockliner acting like a soft ankle brace, and the super stability of the shoe, I suggest maybe a thinner brace may work as well, unless you need the extra protection due to previous injury. The shoe is really stable so the only real risk of rolling is a misstep from changes of direction or bad landing from a jump. Unlike some other 'swooshie' shoes, the cradle side wall is very high and so spilling out and rolling the ankle is quite difficult to do.
I have a history of chronic left ankle sprains and recently severely sprained my right ankle so I am a little scared to go without my ankle brace. I am using a more rigid ankle brace. I may just need to order one and see what it's like. I found that while maybe I don't roll my ankle as often in SCB, the expanded outsole ridge made the sprains far more severe. The Stycon might be better without it.



Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
 

Sardines

Hall of Fame
Oh ok that's looks thick! I know a few guys who wear braces like that. I can't tell you how stable the Stycon will be if you're wearing that, because you may lift your foot a little higher in the EVA rim cradle. It's really lowdown, and the cradle gives it that extra stability. You may also want to get 0.5 and 1 size up as well and return the ones that don't fit. It's a snug fit.
 
Top